Letter: Where the truth about climate change?

Where's the truth about climate change?

Editor: Recently there have been a few letters to the editor and opinion columns that imply there is still debate among scientists regarding the extent to which human activity is causing global warming of our air and sea. As pointed out on the NASA website, 97 percnt of scientists trust the data and believe the same conclusion. What the general public might not appreciate is that, rarely do that many scientists agree on anything — especially when a complex phenomenon such as climate is being studied.

Having said that, what is still unclear is who, where and when do we have winners and losers. Don’t expect Wall Street to guide you. For those folks, long term is the next quarter. Don’t expect the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth from the energy companies or the land owners that are selling the right to squeeze more hydrocarbons out of the ground. They are focused on making money — lots of it. The answer to the question — what can we expect in the future — will come from careful, peer-reviewed, environmental research. If you care about your children’s future, support that research, vote for representatives that understand the problem and stay tuned.

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.

Yes, " there is still debate among scientists regarding the extent to which human activity is causing global warming of our air and sea." And lots of debate. Which is good because the global warming industry is sucking up hundreds of billions of dollars trying to change the climate when those dollars could be used to fight poverty and disease. When you hear that "97% of scientists agree", you should ask "what kinds of scientists?". A microbiologist for example knows no more about climate change than you and I. So, why are so many so-called "scientists" signing on to an unproven theory? Follow the money! Universities and government agencies live on government handouts, as do businesses that profit from making things that sound good but don't reduce global mean temperature - such as solar farms and wind farms and huge ethanol plants that convert good corn into bad automobile fuel. By the way, a great majority of real climate scientists agree that we don't know how much human activity effects the weather, and that we should focus on adapting to changing conditions. Incidentally, if global warming happens, it's not a bad thing at all. But there hasn't been any global warming for 16 years - although there's been plenty of hot air from politicians looking for money from the global warming lobby.

How much money would oil companies spend for junk science to protect their billion dollar cartel? Perhaps more than a climate scientist earns digging ice core samples in a frozen wasteland?

"By the way, a great majority of real climate scientists agree that we don't know how much human activity effects the weather, and that we should focus on adapting to changing conditions."

Majority of climate scientists? Could point us to the where that statistic is derived? Actually they know we are affecting our climate, just the exact precise degree, but they are agreed it isn't a positive trend.

"But there hasn't been any global warming for 16 years "

Could you point us to the data and research(other than Exxon's of course) that supports that claim?

Try to deviate from the Obama administration propaganda on this, at least as far as the number. Their website says "97% of climate scientists".

I am calling BS on the good Doctor. Please tell me when consensus is science and tell me why the data, admitted to by IPCC even states the planet has stopped warming?

Produce the names of the 97% and a signed statement from each that Climate Change is the fact, that it is caused by man's activities and that we must surrender our liberty to save ourselves.

It is rich that the good Dr. calls out those people enriching themselves on the issue. His quote:

"Don’t expect the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth from the energy companies or the land owners that are selling the right to squeeze more hydrocarbons out of the ground. They are focused on making money — lots of it."

What about Al Gore, the guru of the Gaia crowd. He entered the VP worth around 3 million. Now his networth is in the hundreds (high) of millions of dollars. What about all the "scientists" who earn big salaries producing junk studies, paid for by government grants, who only want's to pay for an outcome and not a real body of knowledge, to support stealing money from our pockets to "save humanity".

Sorry Dr. Judice. I am not sure what kind of doctor you are. In this instance you are no more than a political partisan as revelaed by your statements here and your other editorials supporting Obamacare. This is just Obamascience.